Joanna Hogg, painterly, modernist Brit filmmaker utilizing static frames, uneasy vibes

This has more in common with Archipelago, notably the uses of lacunae,

that's a good word word to describe the vibe I was getting the other night which was a feeling of the emptiness of being around other people - if that makes any sense. I've never really got into her movies before but this one has piqued my interest. It's Hiddleston's furrowed brow and godawful acting that put me off her previous movies, can't deal with anything with that prick in it.

he's only in Exhibition for about 5 minutes tbf

Ah that's the one with Viv Albertine.. Thank god!

second view, clearly a great leap fwd

he seemed like less of a tosser this time

yep

I'll have to think about that whenever I do see it again because yeah, a negative charisma zone who thinks himself special. (Which, good job on the actor nailing that part of the character! A lesser actor wouldn't've managed it.) That said I take at face value the fact that there is an attraction, however invisible to me on the one hand but clearly shown in the film on the other.

That said I also think there's something to be said for reading this through a double lens of its setting in the past and in another country because viewing it from a 2019 lens meant that I couldn't help but think of the opiate explosion and lingering impact, and how we treat/talk about addiction now, but again, specifically, here, not the UK. As with other things in the film you fill in the gaps as you choose.

Music choices great, obv.

*SPOILERS, probably*

Interesting seeing this after the new Almodovar - two autobiographical films about filmmaker self-substitutes riddled with heroin that end almost identically, give or take a coda shot in Souvenir.

this was very exciting for an hour but the second half is significantly less interesting. my showing was preceded by an interview with JH in which she complained that her films are always judged through the prism of class but that class was "something she just wasn't very interested in" (!) i felt like shouting out "easy for you to say!"

Tom Burke is amazing in this. he really knows how to smoke on camera.

lol nonsense thing to say seeing as some of the dialogue/themes in her movie is about class and privilege, but I've only seen the first half so far.

weird af!

to be clear this was a filmed intro, not JH herself in the room.

so it would have been even weirder to shout out!

The Souvenir is brilliant. I don’t know what more people want sometimes.

how many of you are in Europe

I’m from western Maryland.

I just thought the guy this film was focused on was such a complete zero, it made it hard for me to watch

But not unrewarding.

there was something about it that was interesting, true

it more to do with her

had more

this wasn't very good imo. at least compared to her last two

kind of The Line Of Beauty as befalling a woman but without the...beauty. or the downfall. thirty years later, she became Joanna Hogg, filmmaker. kind of a dull denouement?autobiographical films c/d etc

some lovely shots (stick to the steady-cam stuff!) esp that one of them in the mirror in Venice but I couldn't like or be moved by any of the characters

yes there was downfall but only of a tawdry he-was-bad-news-all-along sort

and yes the line of beauty works THAT angle too but...better

I haven't seen her other films but I loathed this one precisely because the main characters were so unbearably uninteresting and completely predictable. A couple where one is an asshole junkie and the other is a doormat. Neither of them are compelling in the least...

But I will check out one of her other films... tonight hopefully

how do The Line of Beauty -- the novel, presumably -- and this film intersect?

young flawed aesthete enters new flawed milieu in the decade of exploding drug use and tries to have it all (in their own way) idk, it was constantly on my mind as I watched

themes of luxury, class, delusion, persistence

Watching this tonight after catching up with Archipelago and Exhibition on MUBI.

this was very exciting for an hour but the second half is significantly less interesting. my showing was preceded by an interview with JH in which she complained that her films are always judged through the prism of class but that class was "something she just wasn't very interested in" (!) i felt like shouting out "easy for you to say!"
Tom Burke is amazing in this. he really knows how to smoke on camera.
― Funky Isolations (jed_), Sunday, 1 September 2019 bookmarkflaglink

Like yeah definitely but it is a misrepresentation of her work if people are saying class is an interest for her because it plainly is not. She is basically making films about the kind of people she knows. The one time it does come in is the cook in Archipelago, but its a bit like Francoise in Proust, it has a character that is shown to be smart, something more (when she notices there was no painting in the room anymore and it certainly interacts with the guests - but class relations are done in a very short space of time) but it functions as a bit of relief to the goings on in the family's quiet cruelty to one another (this is a bit rough actually the cook is trapped a bit more in the goings on than I am making it sound, but the film doesn't spend a lot of time on this).

I think Duras' films were quite important for her in that respect. That way of observing people confined to a particular space except she makes the space seem incredibly attractive (Duras's spaces referred at times to a colonial past) at first, then as time goes on we see people in their own together -- and how spaces can enable that. It is barely about making people into something film-like in its attractiveness (British realism in a European style is quite a fusion I hadn't quite seen many Brit filmmakers pull off with such ease), her way of filming just allows them to be whatever they'd like to be -- a very striking quality when looking at Viv Albertine.

it's useful for me to see that lack of interest made explicit by her because it might be what keeps her stuff strictly at arm's length for me

oooh the Françoise analogy's a good 'un.

Hogg has put together a book documenting the Chantal Akerman screenings from a couple of years ago. Attending the event on the 24th.

https://mailchi.mp/a2c6b615bffd/a-nos-amours-chantal-akerman-book-screenings-1606117

This felt like a proper film in comparison to her previous efforts -- actual music in it and more than a couple of locations and more populated, even if you still have a cool flat and the whole centred around two people with a third or fourth character (in this case the mother) and I think this:

There are lots of things in Hogg's style that connect her to earlier British avant-garde filmmakers like Laura Mulvey and Sally Potter, without even addressing the distinctly British concerns - class, social hierarchy - that are embedded in the films themselves.

― sʌxihɔːl (Ward Fowler), Tuesday, 17 February 2015 bookmarkflaglink

Is very well put in reagrds to the earlier films, and now she has become even more open as to how priviledged she has been (with the one line challenge (the 'flat in Knightsbridge' crack) by her tutor). I can't remember a film where a knife is really taken to the filmmaker's own posiiton.

And yes (also as Ward points it out) a very interesting contrast to the Almodovar, even if the class position is different there is a common thread of pain, discovery...you still have to become a person. To learn and be open and generous enough to show yourself on film years later like this, both the good and the bad, and in these two films you see that.

Overall I liked how she baked in some of the ways she shoots and does character into this more straightforward narrative. Also progresses her own reflections on female creativity in a very male environment from Exhibiton.

Shame schlump has left, would like to read a post rn on this.

"knife to your own position" is essentially just maaturbation at her level of success and connection, is my issue

The problem is that she doesn't come across as self-contragulatory, and its nowhere near a sympathetic portrait. At that point she isn't a success in that film school, nor that interesting, doesn't have many friends (that are shown). But she does portray how it is -- that she needed mummy's money, the bad decisions. There is a vague Proustian project to portray this not-that-much of a person who somehow ends up producing worthwhile art. The thing is you have to show yourself in all that ugliness (connections, priviledge, whatever), like its part of a bargain.

(I wouldn't even say she is much of a success now, beyond the films she makes she isn't a recognised name here beyond art house circles.)

"knife to your own position" is essentially just maaturbation at her level of success and connection, is my issue

― Simon H.

dude really

sorry Comrade Simon, i'm with Sotosyn here :)

I just saw this and really enjoyed it. I'm not much of a film expert or critic, so my comments may be dumb, but:

I wasn't sure about the first half hour. I found it difficult to follow and a little boring. Slowly however, just like Julie, I got sucked into the relationship and the film. Reading the upthread Hogg's comments that she is uninterested in class seems crazy, because I thought the film to be saturated in class (albeit mostly of the middle/upper middle kind). There is so much else there was well: a kind of Portrait of the Artist as a Young Wo(man), but cut off before she articulates or reaches her own aesthetic vision, except maybe the film you are watching is it.

Both the leads were just fantastic. His character is tough to pull off and maybe he doesn't because I didn't see what she liked about him. I just chalked it up to her being so shy/withdrawn that she felt he was good enough or deserved it. I don't know.

Most interesting part for me was the camera. There were a couple of panning/moving camera shots at the opening party and again near the end, but most of the shots were frozen shots of single rooms with the actors moving through the shot. That scene near the end where we are watching Julie watching the filming of her student project was amazing - the camera moves slightly to lock in on her face as her fellow students move past her for a zoom shot on the film within a film. And then she turns to look at the camera. Loved it.

well, I guess Hogg writes what she knows

and she basically only knows upper-middle-class twats

Good on her!

I liked the film curation stuff she's done in London but her films are far less interesting than those by the filmmakers she admires.

Student thesis film Caprice streaming here until Friday. Very early Tilda Swinton appearance (billed as "Matilda Swinton," in fact).
https://www.lecinemaclub.com/now-showing/caprice/

Can't wait to watch The Souvenir sequel.

She opened up splendidly. Almost the match of its predecessor. The only long film about a female director discovering her talent?

Intrigued!

Just watched Souvenir II last night, I thought it was great! Maybe her best? Her most formally inventive anyway. Of course, I’m a sucker for meta-movies about moviemaking. This one reminded me in parts of Mulholland Drive and Cocteau’s Testament of Orpheus, even though it’s not nearly as overt in its methods as either.

I was tempted to name it my favorite film of 2021 but Hogg already took the 2019 honors.

I liked how it wasn't "just" a sequel but a different approach entirely — like a retelling in a way of part I, or a telling of how she (personally/artistically) processed the trauma of part I. And how she developed as an artist at the same time. Plus, like the first part, a great example of how to do a period piece that really inhabits its time without being showy about it.

The details, details: Swinton's Rosalind, still crushing on Tony, nursing her conspiracy theories about his death; Richard Ayoade as Patrick; denying the audience a climax.